Grier's Appeal

• Decision Date: 20 November 1882
• Citation: 101 Pa. 412
• Parties: Grier's Appeal.
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Page 412

101 Pa. 412

Grier's Appeal.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

October 25, 1882.

November 20, 1882.

October 25th 1882.

Before SHARSWOOD, C. J., MERCUR, GORDON, PAXSON, TRUNKEY and GREEN, JJ. STERRETT, J., absent

APPEAL of Joseph Grier from a decree of the Court of Common Pleas No. 1 of Allegheny county: In Equity: Of October Term 1882, No. 158 W. F. McCook (with whom was James Grier), for appellant. —The complainants failed to prove the lunacy of Rosanna Hamilton. But the fact is immaterial, because her execution of the mortgage as guardian was under the order of court, and could not, therefore, be impaired by her lunacy. The order of court which gave her this power, thereby in fact appointed her to act as guardian of these minors, and was sufficient authority even if no previous appointment could be shown. By its own decree the court determined that it had jurisdiction to act; and its decision must stand. There is no authority to go behind it: McClure v. Commonwealth, 30 Smith 167; Foster v. Id., 11 Casey 148. There was no sufficient proof of Mrs. White's minority when she executed the mortgage, but in any event she ratified it after becoming of age by repeated payments of interest on it without objection.

W. K. Jennings, for appellee.—The payment of interest on the mortgage after Mrs. White reached her majority was not a ratification by her. The money used for this purpose came from property owned in common by her with her mother and sisters and she was not obliged to demand a settlement with them and forbid the use of her share for such purpose: Urban v. Grimes, 2 Grant 96; Schrader v. Decker, 9 Pa. St. 14. It is not denied that within its jurisdiction a decree of Orphans' Court cannot be reversed or avoided collaterally in another court. But the order of Orphans' Court in this case was void for want of jurisdiction. The said court is competent to administer the estates of minors only upon the application of proper parties: Silver v. County of Schuylkill, 8 Casey 356; Peeble's Appeal, 15 S. & R. 39; McPherson v. Cunliff, 11 S. & R. 422; O'Keron's Appeal, 2 Grant 303; Keene's Appeal, 10 Smith 504; Halsey v. Jate, 2 Smith 311.

Mr. Justice GORDON delivered the opinion of the court, November 20th 1882.

On the 27th of June 1874, Rosanna Hamilton presented her petition in the Orphans' Court of Allegheny county, averring that she had been appointed guardian of Sarah Ida and Hattie May Hamilton on the ____ day of August 1862, and prayed for authority to mortgage certain property of the said minors, in order to pay for the grading of certain property of the estate of Charles Hamilton, father of the said minors. The customary order was made by the court, and a bond with approved sureties executed and filed.

On the 30th of June 1874, Mrs. Hamilton, as guardian aforesaid, and in her own right, together with Margaret Jane Hamilton (now Agnew) and Ann Eliza Hamilton (now White), executed the mortgage in controversy to Lewis McMullen, who afterwards, for a valuable consideration, assigned to the appellant.

To June Term 1881 the bill before us, praying for a decree for the cancellation or satisfaction of this mortgage, was filed. In support of the prayer thus made, three allegations were set forth: That at the time of the execution of the mortgage Ann Eliza Hamilton was not of age; that Mrs. Rosanna Hamilton was not then in her right mind; that she was not, and never had been, guardian of the said minors.

The court below, after reference to a Master and hearing of the parties, entered the following decree:

"1st. That as to the one-fourth interest in said mortgage made by Margaret Jane Hamilton, now Margaret Jane Agnew, this bill be dismissed. 2d. That as to the remainder of said mortgage, the defendant...